Braddock vs. Herbold: A lengthy, tight City Council contest between two blue chip candidates

Jargon-rooted questions from an activist Seattle audience can stump even progressive office seekers; witness the next-to-last query posed as 34th District Democrats watched District 1 City Council candidates Shannon Braddock and Lisa Herbold debate on Wednesday night.

“What did you do today to confront your own white privilege?” a written query asked Braddock and Herbold.

Shannon Braddock, District 1 Seattle City Council candidate. “Actively engaged” in West Seattle community, not just when running.

Both confessed they were doorbelling.

Braddock and Herbold have been together at community forums since February. Both are impressive. The city’s new district election system has worked to give West Seattle-South Park voters a choice of the greater of two goods.

Braddock is a longtime community and school volunteer, and serves as chief of staff to King County Council member Joe McDermott. She is a veteran of food banks and PSTA meetings, but also the successful battle to block a big gravel mine on Maury Island.

Herbold is a longtime policy aide — and policy shaper — to Seattle City Council member Nick Licata. A Herbold supporter, Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes, has described her as the sort of person you can engage in a heated argument with, but proceed to get something accomplished.

“I think there are still people out there trying to figure out where you two differ,” joked Tracy Record of the West Seattle Blog, one of three moderators at Wednesday’s debate.

So it was for a while. Both candidates will vote for the gargantuan $930 million property tax levy for transportation on the city’s November ballot. “Yes, I absolutely support the Move Seattle levy,” said Braddock. She vowed to help hold the Seattle Department of Transportation’s “feet to the fire to make sure they meet the goals to which they are committed.”

Braddock said she will champion Sound Transit 3, which would extend light rail service to West Seattle and Burien, and press Metro for RapidRide feed lines. “I am a hard-core transportation and transit advocate,” said Braddock.

Herbold is supporting Move Seattle but is deeply concerned about the city piling one big property tax levy on top of another. “I believe strongly there should have been a different method to fund it,” said Herbold, whose boss, Nick Licata, tried — and failed — to get council colleagues to lessen the record-levy’s impact on homeowners.

Herbold believes the city should look at developer fees, reinstating the employee head tax — taken away during the Great Recession — and raising money through parking taxes.

Lisa Herbold, District 1 council candidate, charges that “landlords, big developers and downtown business” are out to beat her.

The candidates again differed slightly on the latest depredations of the Department of Transportation, notably a “rechannelization” of 35th Avenue Southwest. As with Fauntleroy, the busy arterial is being reduced from two traffic lanes in each direction down to one lane going each way, with a turn lane in the middle.

Critical questions are being asked around the city. SDOT is doing similar “road diets” and “rechanneling” on 23rd Avenue in the Central Area, and Rainier Avenue in southeast Seattle. The headstrong city department justifies its projects on the grounds of safety. But they are creating congestion and shoving traffic onto side streets.

Braddock described herself as “a huge proponent of that (35th SW) project.” She argued that local residents will get used to it and be glad they no longer live on “I-35.” She added: “I believe that SDOT is doing a lot in engagement and there is much more to do.”

Herbold was a little more critical. She depicted SDOT’s strategy as to “throw out an idea,” take flak, then muscle ahead with what it wants to do. She argued that more legitimate consultation is needed. She added district council members have a duty to bird-dog capital projects, making sure they are on budget and on time. The Seattle City Council has been a sleeping dog on the Bertha tunnel dig and the over-budget/behind-schedule Seattle seawall rebuild.

The new District 1 council member will have other bird-dogging to do.

The cleanup of the Duwamish River is vitally important to immigrants and people of color, who have found themselves breathing dirtier air and fishing in more toxic waters than residents of the city’s other communities.

As is often the case when two progressives fight it out, Braddock and Herbold are directing fire at each other. The fight has become downright nasty among certain candidate supporters.

Of her qualifications, said Braddock, she has been “actively engaged in the community, not just the last seven months running for office.” It’s a question that resonates. Herbold has spent lots more time over the years cultivating The Stranger on First Hill than the West Seattle Herald or the influential West Seattle Blog.

So tight have been Stranger-Herbold ties that Seattle City Council member Jean Godden once gave Herbold the nickname “Lisa who leaks.”

In turn, Herbold took shots at Neighbors for Shannon, an “independent” expenditure group that has recently collected $130,500 for pre-election spending. The Citizens Alliance for a Sound Economy, political arm of the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, has been neighborly to the tune of $70,000. The Washington Restaurant Association, a very conservative neighbor, has given $28,000. Seattle Fire Fighters have donated $5,000.

“Landlords, big developers and downtown business” are ganging up to defeat her, Herbold told the Democrats.

Likewise, an argument that resonates. Unfortunately, the independent expenditures have set off nasty personal attacks and ideological characterizations of Braddock by Herbold supporters at the left end of Seattle’s political spectrum. Checking their email boxes in the morning, reporters have found whip-smart Herbold position papers, but also gutter attacks on Braddock by her backers.

In a polarized political climate, supporters at the extremes instinctively move to demean, unable to argue that their candidate is just plain better, and why.